1st ranked offense, 30th ranked defense. What's scary is that offensive ranking is purely because of how talented we are, still nowhere near meshed or have the system down. The defense on the other hand... we don't have the raw talent/individual defenders to compensate for so until we master the system and everybody buys in.. it's not going to be the best. I also read that we have scored more points in the first 3 games of the season than any team since Nash's Suns in I think it was 09 or 10.

Voyeur

11/03/2013 - 01:32 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 5129

votes: 29

My question is what would our defense rank without the individual performances of Curry and Isaiah Thomas? 2 basically unguardable performances. The Lakers game was just flat out terrible.

ClippersDA

11/03/2013 - 01:38 PM PST

CTB MVP X1

Posts: 3993

votes: 12

I really am concerned about our defense. We don't have one lockdown defender in the roster, and we aren't that big.

clipperAndrew

11/03/2013 - 01:39 PM PST

Clipper All-Star

Posts: 1804

votes: 10

What about the stat that wen Byron Mullens plays we are undefeated! Why aren't more people picking up on this! MVP MVP MVP

Clippersfan86

11/03/2013 - 01:43 PM PST

CTB MVP Champion

Posts: 15543

Location: Anaheim

votes: 91

Mindblown! Hahaha...

Voyeur

11/03/2013 - 01:46 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 5129

votes: 29

I think having a great team defense is better than one or two lockdown defenders any day. If DJ can truly establish himself as one of the best rim protectors in the league, that would help tremendously. And when our team is playing Doc's defense with the right intensity, we look flat out amazing. Those first two preseason games we looked awesome. Like Doc said, against the Lakers it was like we forgot everything we learned. I agree with Doc about how the defense looked much better against GS despite Curry's incredibly hot shooting. If Curry's 9 three pointers were all just wide open jumpers, I'd understand the concern. But I like the overall D I saw against GS and I like what I saw against Sac also. And I'm sure we're only gonna get better.

CP3Heliflopter

11/03/2013 - 01:48 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 6469

votes: 10

DJ has been doing a good job so far. The problem is that the rest of the team has not for the most part outside of maybe CP3. We will definitely get better over time. A lot of it has to do with our players getting used to the defensive system and getting used to playing together. One problem that is not going away without a trade however is our terrible bench bigs.

Voyeur

11/03/2013 - 01:54 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 5129

votes: 29

One might suggest our SG's are actually doing a better job defending than CP3 considering we've been torched by point guards the last two games. But I say that in jest, knowing that he played hard on D against those guys.

Truth is, I like how our SG's have defended so far. Admittedly, they're definitely going to have their hands full with James Harden coming up. But I disagree that the rest of the team outside of CP3 and DJ have been that bad. The bench certainly has though.

Amnesty_David_Stern

11/03/2013 - 02:07 PM PST

Clipper All-Star

Posts: 2333

votes: 7

Cp3 is our best defender and DJ would be next. That's quite the bit of drop off.

I too am concerned about the defense but hopefully with Doc here and some different coaching schemes and tricks he can try to mask our lack of great defense a bit better than Vinny did.

Were not going to be a stopper type team here, if we wanted that we woulda freed up cap space and kept Bledsoe to start him at the 2 and went after more defensive specialists in free agency but we didn't.

Our team is built around our offense and their ability to maintain control of the clock. Guys just have to try to give a little extra effort to being more aware on defense of what is going on.

And yes, that Laker game was awful they beat the tar out of us.

CP3Heliflopter

11/03/2013 - 02:07 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 6469

votes: 10

Isaiah actually didn't even score a single point until he was guarded by Collison and then he scored 11 points very quickly. After that he got into a rhythm and was hard to guard. It didn't even matter who was guarding Curry he torched them. At least CP3 made Curry turn over the ball a lot.

Didn't Curry have like 11 or 12 TOs?

Amnesty.

CP3 isn't our highest impact defender. That would be DJ. Unless you are talking about relative to their position. I think CP3 is a tad overrated on defense. He has difficulties sometimes due to being undersized but on the flip side I think he underrated on offense. When people talk about who is the best offensive player in the nba I rarely see his name mentioned which is just bizarre.

Voyeur

11/03/2013 - 02:13 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 5129

votes: 29

Fair enough.

Meanwhile Curry had 7 turnovers last night in their win against Sac. Klay had 27 points and looked a lot more open than he did playing against us. Interestingly, Cousins and Thomas had crap games last night after exploding against us even though Bogut and Curry aren't exactly lockdown defenders themselves. But that should come as no surprise to see players play up against us only to deflate the next game.

Agent0

11/03/2013 - 03:11 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 5910

votes: 53

Doc's rotations are interesting though, but actually so far kind of in line with what I was expecting except for the big men minutes.

Paul 36 / Collison 12

Redick 29 / Jamal 24

Dudley 26 / Barnes 23

Griffi 39 / Mullens 12 (1 DNP)

Jordan 36 / Hollins 5

Of course Jamal is playing a few MPG at SF and Barnes or Dudley a few MPG as a PF. Clearly we can see that there is little trust with the teams bigs. If we can find a PF/C big man to play about 20 MPG (10 at PF, 10 at C), bring Griffin down to 36 MPG, and Barnes/Dudley will play about 4 MPG at PF while Crawford also gets about 4 MPG at SF.

That will be a good set rotation.

tense2

11/03/2013 - 03:26 PM PST

CTB MVP X3

Posts: 10383

votes: 24

Too small a sample size to worry about. See where we are after 20-25 games.

Voyeur

11/03/2013 - 03:31 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 5129

votes: 29

It makes it all the stranger that we cut Amundson. I mean, unless it truly is because we have our eye on another big man, his addition helps more than NOT having him, right? He didn't play great in preseason, but it doesn't mean he wouldn't have turned it up a notch when the season started. Weird.

CP3Heliflopter

11/03/2013 - 03:32 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 6469

votes: 10

We should play more small ball considering how bad our backup bigs are. Is Jamison injured or are we saving him for later?

Voyeur

11/03/2013 - 03:35 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 5129

votes: 29

Apparently, we're saving him for later, which makes no sense to me. I think it's Doc-speak for Jamison's not my first choice so I probably won't play him.

DocHollywood

11/03/2013 - 03:48 PM PST

Posts: 327

Location: Honolulu

votes: 2

Our pace has quickened substantially so opponents are getting more possessions, meaning more points. The point differential is more important to me right now then whether our opponents are cracking 100 or not. The team defense will continue to improve, especially once we trade Jamal for a third big....

Voyeur

11/03/2013 - 03:52 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 5129

votes: 29

That's a good point about the pace.

clipper321

11/03/2013 - 03:54 PM PST

Clipper All-Star

Posts: 1386

Location: California

votes: 10

I've been sneakily impressed by JJ Reddick. The dude played solid D on Thomson in the warriors game and chased Marcus Thornton around screens all night in the Kings game.

He's been underrated defensively thus far.

CP3Heliflopter

11/03/2013 - 03:56 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 6469

votes: 10

In terms of defensive rating (points per 100 possessions) we are ranked dead last so that is not it. However, I am not overly worried just yet. We still have time to get that good defensive backup big AND its still early and we are adjusting. The first game was an anomlay and the 2nd game Curry was hot.

ClipperPostman

11/03/2013 - 04:08 PM PST

CTB MVP X1

Posts: 2530

votes: 24

Yea lets trade our 3rd best scorer, who saved us last game with timely

3's, for a mediocre big at best, who won't nearly replace his scoring production.

I'm glad Doc's the coach and not you..

Voyeur

11/03/2013 - 04:23 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 5129

votes: 29

Early on, I was on board the idea of trading Crawford for a big man for a variety of reasons. Primarily because Doc seemed to want him to change his game, at first. And it seemed that Crawford was going to have issues with that. Plus we have Willie and even Reggie that can fill in at that position. However Doc appears to have relaxed his stand on Jamal's game and given him the green light to "be Jamal" and he's been great. Now I'm kinda loving our SG tandem. They even both play together when they go small. So I'm good with keeping Crawford. Still, we sure could use a big man right now.

Looking at our bench, it's pretty amazing. We have a great PG who's not playing well but I think it's because he's not quite 100% healthy. We're GREAT at SG. We're solid at SG (again, we're waiting for Barnes to get back into his rhythm after injury). It's center and PF that we're struggling. Yet, we know Hollins can be adequate at the C. We've seen him do some things well last year. His fouls are out of control. If he was able to somehow figure that out, he'd be very solid at that position. At PF, Mullens has disappointed me. I ain't gonna lie. I was impressed when we picked him up. Now I'm shaking my head. What I don't get is I'm sure Jamison can hit a lot of those shots Mullens was missing. And, while I know Jamison is not known for defense, he can certainly rebound and he's still in good enough shape to try and defend. PLAY JAMISON DAMMIT is what I'm saying I guess. But, yes, we're still missing something off the bench.

clipper*joe

11/03/2013 - 04:33 PM PST

CTB MVP Champion

Posts: 16440

Location: los angeles

votes: 130

Best observation in this thread. Repped!

WTH? I tried giving a rep point but all I get is this:

"Message was too short to be repped."

tense2

11/03/2013 - 04:39 PM PST

CTB MVP X3

Posts: 10383

votes: 24

Amundson was/is terrible. No help there unless you want more fouls, lol.

CP3Heliflopter

11/03/2013 - 04:50 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 6469

votes: 10

Who said anything about a mediocre big? If we are trading Crawford we are going to trade him for a quality big man.

Its preferable that we get that big man without trading for Crawford. We will see. As nice as Crawford is a good defensive big is a bigger need. Our problem isn't offense. We are always going to be a top 5 offensive team wit CP + BG + shooters. Its our defense especially bench defense.

Clippersfan86

11/03/2013 - 04:54 PM PST

CTB MVP Champion

Posts: 15543

Location: Anaheim

votes: 91

Yea Jamal has done very well scoring like 17 ppg on 52 percent shooting so far this year and he's played within a team concept. Maybe we can package Willie Green and a future pick for a backup big?

CP3Heliflopter

11/03/2013 - 04:57 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 6469

votes: 10

The problem is the salary doesn't work. I doubt we can get the backup big we need for anything under MLE type money.

ClipperPostman

11/03/2013 - 05:01 PM PST

CTB MVP X1

Posts: 2530

votes: 24

What bench big man isn't medicore? STARTING quality big men are a shortage in this league. What big man off the bench would be worth giving up your 3rd best scorer?

Our bench offense is a problem WITH crawford, so without him would be a disaster. Who can make up 16-17pts off the bench? Matt Barnes is a scrapper. Willie Green is inconsistent, bullock hasn't even played in the NBA yet, and you trust him to be your #1 go to offensive player off the bench?

I have watched every game every season, and without Crawford we would lose quite a few games, especially when no one can score and you need someone who can go 1 on 1 and score at will.

I said all that to say name this "Magic Big" that's out there on someones bench that is good enough to cost your 3rd best scorer?

tense2

11/03/2013 - 05:03 PM PST

CTB MVP X3

Posts: 10383

votes: 24

Jamal is our best chance at getting a useful big IF it comes up. You do it IMO.

ClipperPostman

11/03/2013 - 05:10 PM PST

CTB MVP X1

Posts: 2530

votes: 24

You give up 17 points off the bench and a 4th quarter scorer for a backup big that is going to play 20 minutes and grab a few extra rebounds?

Like I've said numerous times, I'm glad Doc is the coach, because many ideas I see on here don't make any sense what so ever.

CP3Heliflopter

11/03/2013 - 05:15 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 6469

votes: 10

3rd best scorer does not equate to 3rd best player not even close and Crawford isn't as important to our offense as you think. Please tell me how Willie Green is inconsistent. Green is a perfect 2nd stringer. We don't have any backup big that is not a 3rd stringer.

Tell me the "quite a few games" we would lose without Crawford. Maybe under VDN since we had no actual offense. The problems our team has stem from defense and Crawford definitely doesn't help in that regard, he makes that problem worse. What we need is a good defensive big that can play 20ish mpg. Someone like Elton Brand last season.

CP3Heliflopter

11/03/2013 - 05:18 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 6469

votes: 10

No we give up 17 points off the bench so our bench doesn't have the worst defense in the league. Our bench bigs are putrid defensively. Even a big that is average defensively is a huge upgrade. You act like we can't make up for those 17 points.... We were fine offensively in 2011. 4th in the nba in fact with a mediocre starting SG and SF.

You severely undervalue how much impact a good defensive backup big can have. They are not scrub players contrary to what you might believe.

Asik filled that exact same role only two seasons ago.

DocHollywood

11/03/2013 - 05:30 PM PST

Posts: 327

Location: Honolulu

votes: 2

This is why you're a postman and not a basketball coach lol. An MLE level big is most certainly a greater need than a one dimensional scorer like Jamal right now. Seriously, do you not realize we have the most potent offense since the 2009-2010 Suns? And that our defense is the worst in the league? This is not even worthy of debate right now. Doc will VERY likely trade Jamal by the deadline, you'll see.

ClipperPostman

11/03/2013 - 05:30 PM PST

CTB MVP X1

Posts: 2530

votes: 24

Ok name this big? WHo is out there? 2011 we were fine because we had nick young coming off the bench, filling the same role as crawford.

I don't think you realize the importance of a scoring 2 guard off the bench.

We can easily make up 17 points off the bench??? Do you even watch the games or read the stats?

There are times when the bench stagnates and no one can score. That has happened in every game this season from the bench. Crawford is the only bench player putting up points.

ClipperPostman

11/03/2013 - 05:34 PM PST

CTB MVP X1

Posts: 2530

votes: 24

You don't seem to know much about basketball.

You think a 17ppg 2 guard off the bench doesn't have something to do with the most potent offense?

You think a big man playing 20mins ppg is going to have that much of an impact? REally? a big man who is going to play 20min ppg is going to take a defense from #30 to #1?

Like i said doc is the coach for a reason and you are not.

CP3Heliflopter

11/03/2013 - 05:40 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 6469

votes: 10

And you really think Crawford has that much impact on our offense? Crawford or not we are a top 5 offensive team. Crawford or not our bench is pretty stagnant offensively but what makes things even worse is that our bench gives us so many points.

Stop making dumb assumptions. I never said that a bench big would make our defense that much better but it certainly makes a big difference upgrading from Mullens or Hollins to a capable big.

Odom was our best defensive big last season and anchored our bench defense. He was a large part of the reason why our defense was so good early season. Having a good backup bench big will make our defense significantly better.

You think 17 points is difficult to make up for? There are plenty of guys on our teams not getting many shots that can shoot more. We have Willie Green who doesn't even get any minutes who can give us 10ish points. In comparison we have no 2nd string big. Its a bigger need by far.

You seem to be under the impression I want to give up Crawford for any scrub big. Nope. If the opportunity arises and we can get an MLE quality big that fits the criteria we should try to get him. Its precisely Crawford's value that would allow us to get such a big if the opportunity arises.

DocHollywood

11/03/2013 - 05:41 PM PST

Posts: 327

Location: Honolulu

votes: 2

Postman, stop and think about the merits of everyone else's opinions before you begin insulting the majority.

Voyeur

11/03/2013 - 05:45 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 5129

votes: 29

I will say that, in theory, without Jamal the 2nd unit would have to focus more on team basketball. Making the extra pass, relying on the quickness of Collison to penetrate and find the open shooter. Perhaps Willie Green in the corner. In theory, we would see less ISO plays...

Agreed tense2. Patience will pay off in acquiring a quality big. Doc is wise to wait so long as we are winning even if Hollins is fouling out in 8 minutes lol

DocHollywood

11/03/2013 - 06:35 PM PST

Posts: 327

Location: Honolulu

votes: 2

You're mistaking forethought for worry. Injuries happen to players like Blake and DJ, especially when they have to play close to 40 minutes a night to cover for a weak bench.....Inevitably, at some point this year we will NEED a good 3rd big man more than we presently think we need Jamal. Crawford is the most likely trade chip. It is what it is.

CP3Heliflopter

11/03/2013 - 06:36 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 6469

votes: 10

Basically this. We aren't trading Crawford for just anybody but when the opportunity for a that big arises trading him should be considered.

tense2

11/03/2013 - 06:43 PM PST

CTB MVP X3

Posts: 10383

votes: 24

It's logical because Jamal is our most "valued" ($) trade chip AND we have a surplus at that backup position.

fullcourt

11/03/2013 - 06:48 PM PST

Clipper Starter

Posts: 564

votes: 6

Without Crawford we are not a top 5 offense. Last year we had 3 of the top 40 scorers in the nba on our team. All three could create a shot for themselves and all three could setup someone else that is why we had a top 10 offense most of the year.

I posted this before the season but Crawford was around 4th amongst all nba shooting guards with 29 games of 20 points or more. Not bench players but ALL shooting guards including starters and he didn't even average over 30 mpg. He was second on the team to Blake in that regard so again while its easy to take what he brings for granted in today's nba Jamal has given us since he is been here the production of a top 10 sg.

Bullock is a unproven rookie

Barnes and Willie are career 20 mpg players who each have averaged double figure scoring twice in there careers. Barnes last year in a contract year and Willie over 5 seasons ago.

Reddick and Dudley combined last year hit 20 or more points 21 times .They are great system players and solid shooters but they are not point producers but shot makers.

Its like Kyle Korver great shooter but 15 shots doesn't equal 20 points with him because the more you need points from him the less effective he is .

We have 3 guys who can get 20 at anytime and they are all very good to great passers and we have surrounded them with a nice group of good shooters who are solid all around players. We remove one of those 20 ppg guys for a good defensive big and the defense improves but now we need more offensive production from everyone including the solid all around guys.

The only way we trade Jamal at this point is if another wing takes a huge step leap if not we just won't move a impact player for bench muscle .

CP3Heliflopter

11/03/2013 - 07:35 PM PST

CTB MVP X2

Posts: 6469

votes: 10

You grossly underestimate how great CP3 is if you think we aren't a top 5 offense without Crawford. CP3 + BG + sharpshooters=top 5 offense. Not to mention great coaching.

We were number 4 in the league offensively the first season CP3 was here with a below average starting SG/SF, terrible shooting and mediocre coaching. We did not have Crawford then. He is far from necessary. He is a great scorer but he is also a poor defender and has tunnel vision.

More importantly, he has a lot of value which can be used in a trade.

tense2

11/03/2013 - 07:50 PM PST

CTB MVP X3

Posts: 10383

votes: 24

^I think He's over valuing a guy who in his career is a below average shooter and slightly above average 3pt. One of the things he's above average at is his FGA's...efficient his isn't. A one trick pony who will shoot you into as many games as he'll shoot you out of.

fullcourt

11/03/2013 - 08:45 PM PST

Clipper Starter

Posts: 564

votes: 6

I'm not underestimating CP anymore than you are putting too must stock into a strike shortened season

I find it fascinating that I said we wouldn't be a top 5 offense anymore and you come at me as if I said we would suck offensively which I didn't .You put stock in a strike shortened season but I don't the amount of effort that would be needed by Blake and CP to keep us in the top 5 offensively simply wouldn't be sustainable for 82 games